Jeff and Marci Beagley were convicted today in an Oregon court for their failure to seek medical care for their 16 year old son, Neil, who died of a urinary tract blockage in 2008. The Beagley’s are members of the Followers of Christ Church which prohibits medical treatment for ailments in lieu of prayer.

The case of medical neglect is not the first in the family. The Examiner reports:

The Beagleys are also the parents of Raylene Worthington, whose 15-month-old daughter, Ava Worthington, the Beagleys’ granddaughter, died in 2008 of pneumonia and a blood infection that would have been easily treatable. Ava’s father, Carl Worthington, was convicted of second-degree criminal mistreatment, yet spent less than two months in jail for her death.

The Beagley’s defense in the case of Neil’s death was based on his right as a 16 year old to deny care. Yet, the courts found that Neil was unable to make such a decision.

An unusually high number of childhood deaths among members of Followers of Christ Church recently caused Oregon to pass a law that restricts “negligent” parents from using faith healing as a defense against such deaths.

I don't know...I mean...though I don't trust doctors...I couldn't imagine not wanting to explore all possible avenues of help if my child was sick. So, the idea that people let a child die of simple, treatable ailments...well, I think it IS neglect.

Would I decide to explore other avenues if my doctors either couldn't figure out what's wrong...or if it's something they consider "untreatable"? Yes. Would I use blessings and prayer and energy workings/Reiki to speed up or bolster traditional healing? Yes.
Would I not consult a doctor at all if my kid was in pain? No.
Would I allow a doctor to immediately drug my kid for silly stuff, like hyperactivity? No.

The idea that only prayer can cure ailments was introduced by a church that wanted total power...and was actively working against "witches" who were wise men and women taught the herbal and energy healing paths of their pagan ancestors. So, it's sort of counter to my beliefs...I'd say.

Do I think the government should make laws telling me what treatment to seek? No
But it is wrong to allow a child to die because someone refuses to allow them help, IMHO.

This sort of thing frustrates me to no end. Either someone is totally for spiritual healing and against western medicine, or the other way around. They're meant to go hand in hand. I'm biased and of course will go for spiritual healing before anything else, but of course I will seek western medicine when it's important.

It's anyone's choice whether they seek medical care or not, but a 15 month-old child does NOT have a voice for him/herself. They just have to hope their parents can care for them. How horrid when they don't.

Crazy Healer LadyHealth and happiness to you!

The purpose of a relationship is not to have another who might complete you, but to have another with whom you might share your completeness. -CWG

I may not trust doctors and western medicine, and I do prefer spiritual healing to them, but they are meant to be used in tandem.

If a medical problem is bothering me for a few days and my Reiki isn't helping I do into the doctors. I have noticed that since I've been doing Reiki, certain medical side effects of drugs happen more often. For example, when I hurt my back earlier this year, within 2 days of taking the medication, my back felt fine, but I could hardly sleep through the night with my stomach reacting as badly as it did (apparently, my body has decided that making my bodily fluids acidic is the best way to keep me healthy ).

To get back on track, I go to doctors when it's obvious that my energy healing isn't doing the trick this time around. Using the two together, means that for things like colds and flu's I'm usually still able to go to work, which makes me very happy!

Trying to create a world, even in words, is good occupational therapy for lunatics who think they're God, and an excellent argument for Polytheism. -S.M. Stirling

The Beagley’s defense in the case of Neil’s death was based on his right as a 16 year old to deny care. Yet, the courts found that Neil was unable to make such a decision.

That defence only applies when the opposite option is open to them, ie to accept care.

It would appear from this families background that, in this case, that would not have existed.

As to faith healing. Most of the tablets doctors give you RELY on you believing they will work. They may actualy only be placeoboes (If thats how it is spelt ). So no denying, on a psychological level it CAN work. But that assumes the symptoms were largely psychosomatic.

If the problems are wholy REAL, then only "conventional" medicine can diagnose and help. AFTER that the two, "conventional medicine and faith healing can be used in tandem.

The Beagley’s defense in the case of Neil’s death was based on his right as a 16 year old to deny care. Yet, the courts found that Neil was unable to make such a decision.

As to faith healing. Most of the tablets doctors give you RELY on you believing they will work. They may actualy only be placeoboes (If thats how it is spelt ). So no denying, on a psychological level it CAN work. But that assumes the symptoms were largely psychosomatic.

Ok, now I have to disagree with you.

All of what you're given has an affect. The affect my be greater or lesser depending upon the person, and the placebo effect does come into play. A double-blind study validates this. The only medicine that relies solely on the placebo effect is homeopathy which has failed every double-blind study ever.